7 réponses à ce sujet

[YouKnowMyName]

Sorry, long post (English is not my native language)

Disclaimer; This is not mean to say ME2 sucks, it is only meant to offer a more critical view of ME2, rather than the praise it always gets. I do not hate ME2, I actually like it quite a lot, but I still cannot deny it has flaws.

I've often seen people complain about the consequences of choices in ME3, but was ME2 really any better? I'm not so sure about that.

Lets look at the different choices from ME1 and how they carried over in ME2;

Lets begin with; Fist

In ME1 you meet Fist, the crime lord and finds out he has betrayed the Shadow Broker and is working for Saren. By either talking to Garrus or Wrex you decide to assault Choras Den and confront Fist since he has something very valuable; A quarian with evidence of Sarens misdeeds. When you find Fist, you find out the quarian is already about to meet Sarens men, and time is getting critical. Understandably Shepard and crew is very angry with Fist, BUT if you do not bring Wrex along, you can actually spare him. If you do then you will meet him again in ME2 on Omega. He is drinking heavily and is throwing insults at you.

And thats the consequence. It is actually a little impressive bioware bothered with him at all considering how many killed him, but is this really enough? Wouldn't it be better if Fist was one of more npcs whom hold critical information regarding some quest or other (Maybe he could have had some additional information on Mordin and Archangel)? I'm just wondering, while his cameo on Omega is nice, is it really enough?


Now over to a more important one;

Shiala (The asari you meet on Feros);

When you kill the Thorian on Feros, you meet Shiala, one of the matriarch Benezias followers whom fell to the spell of indoctrination. When you rescue her from the thorian however, she is no longer under indoc. and she is willingly giving you information. You can however still choose to kill her.

If you save her you will meet her on Illium where she can be found in relation to a quest.

If you kill her, she will be replaced by an colonist whom has the exact same quest.

Now, wouldn't this be more impressive if the quest was unique for those of us whom saved Shiala? Isn't the consequence kinda rendered pointless by offering the quest to both those whom killed her and saved her?

Over to another one;

The Rachni

On Noveria you meet the rachni queen and you can choose to either commit genocide by killing her or give the race a new chance by saving her. If you save her she shows up on Illium in ME2 as a cameo and offers some new insight; The rachni weren't themselves during the rachni wars. They were controlled by something else; It is heavily implied, if not outright said that this is the reapers or Sovereign.

If you do not do the quest however you instead get a news update mentioning how some cloning of the rachni on Noveria failed to get results.

Well, to be honest i'll give a point to ME2 here. Even though it is just a cameo (I was hoping for a mission when I first played ME2), you do get additional information by saving her. Information those whom killed her don't get. So i guesss this is one of the better consequences in ME2. If ME3 had followed up properly this could actually have been a very good arc.

(Posting more soon)

[YouKnowMyName]

Next choice:

The Council Decision:

At the end of ME1 you have three options; Focus on Sovereign and get a mixed council (Neutral ending)

Save the council and The Destiny Ascension by sacrificing human ships (Paragon ending)

or

Abandon the council and get a pure human council (Renegade ending)

In ME2 the consequence is;

Saving the council; Aliens and humans cooperate more, you get to meet the original council, and Shepard is praised as a hero. There are seemingly no negative consequences, since all the council versions deny proof that the reapers exist.

Abandon the council; Humans and aliens have a strained relationship, you do not get to see the new council, and they still deny evidence reapers exist. To be fair, you are outright punished for choosing abandon the council or focus on Sovereign. The game acts exactly the same regardless if it is the mixed or human council whom is in charge. In addition, the change is only felt on the citadel, and there by only two npcs: The Turian guns sller and Avina. They are as far as I know the only ones whom have different dialogue depending on your decision in ME1.

But shouldn't this have consequences far bigger than those we saw? What about Illium, why do the asari on the planet act exactly the same if you destroyed the council as if you saved them? Why are there not more hatred towards you on that planet if you killed them? Is it because we are in The Terminus systems, and the asari there just don't care?

IMO the consequences could have been like this;

Omega - doesn't care about your decision.
Citadel - hates you if you put the human council in charge, loves if saved, and acts decent if mixed council.
Illium - Varies; Some thank you for killing the council, others for saving them. (I bet there ares some shady asari on Illium whom didn't like the original council all that much)
Tuchanka - Krogan calls you weak if you saved the council, when you could have usurped power when you got the chance, but respects you if you killed the council and praises you as a true warrior (They hate the turians and salarians, so naturally they would be glad if you killed them).

I'm just asking why it didn't make more of a difference then it did?

[YouKnowMyName]

This is all i'm going to bring up for now, if there are any more decision you felt wasn't properly handled in ME2 please bring them up.

I have one more; Geth Incursions - Why wasn't it a consequense for not repelling an entire invasion?

[cap and gown]

Almost all of the stuff related to the Rachni, Council, and Feros show up as having an effect on ME3 when determining war assets. Not sure why they had to have a direct effect on ME2. You could also mention the Wrex and Kaiden/Ashley stuff which does not have an effect in ME2 but shows up as important in ME3, especially the Wrex thing.

The most important difference I found about your actions in ME1 for ME2 (besides dialogue differences) is Conrad Verner. If you use Genesis, or don't complete Verner's mini-quest in ME1, then you can't get a discount at the weapon store on Illium. This kinda stinks because I don't want to play ME1 ever again but I would like that discount.

Also, based on the dossiers in the Shadow Broker base, I question whether Fist was actually working for Saren. That was what was claimed in ME1. But based on the dossier on Tali, it was the Shadow Broker who ordered the hit on her, not Saren.

Modifié par cap and gown, 27 juin 2013 - 01:03 .

[YouKnowMyName]

Thanks for responding. I agree with some of the things you said. No, it doesn't have to have an direct effect on ME2, but it's consequences in ME3 aren't all that much. The rachni for example shows up whether you killed or saved them. Shiala isn't seen at all, but we do get an email. And you never see the human council in ME3. If you choose that when they're just replaced with the alternate alien council. (In my headcanon this is a temporary war council though. The human council had to step aside because of vehement protest from the alien races when the reapers hit the galaxy. They didn't trust humanity to be in charge of such an important war.)

I'm glad you mentioned the VS, as that is definitely one of the poorest consequences regarding ME2. Your encounter with them on Horizon is just not what it should be. You aren't even given the chance to defent yourself properly.

Thankfully, that consequence is admittedly better executed in ME3 (Though not perfect).

For the Wrex thing, I actually thought that was the best consequence in ME2. If he is dead you meet his brood brother Wreav, and old fashioned krogan whom bring no new ideas to clan urdnot. If Wrex lives however, you get to see an old friend, and you can see that while the krogans are dissatsfied with his leadership, there is hope he will bring them in a better direction in the future.

As for Conrad Verner, I actually quite like that consequence, but I can understand why that might be annoying. Maybe there should have been an alternate way, albeit more difficult way to achieve the discount if Conrad Verner didn't show up?

[YouKnowMyName]

Oh, and btw I haven't played LoTSB yet. I've just downloaded all dlc for Mass Effect except pinnacle station though, and i'm soon finished with ME1. I look forward to seeing many new things, and hopefully a couple of things i didn't know too. Like that thing with Fist you mentioned, thats interesting.

[cap and gown]

YouKnowMyName wrote...

Thanks for responding. I agree with some of the things you said. No, it doesn't have to have an direct effect on ME2, but it's consequences in ME3 aren't all that much. The rachni for example shows up whether you killed or saved them. Shiala isn't seen at all, but we do get an email.

It determines your war assets. If Feros survives, you get a war asset. Also, it is easier to reach the total points needed to have Feros survive if you spare Shiala making it easier to get that war asset.

If you freed the queen on Noveria, you get 100 war assets if you save her again in ME3. If you killed her on Noveria, then you get a "breeder." Freeing the "breeder" does not give you any war assets and ends up getting Aralakh company killed.

And you never see the human council in ME3. If you choose that when they're just replaced with the alternate alien council. (In my headcanon this is a temporary war council though. The human council had to step aside because of vehement protest from the alien races when the reapers hit the galaxy. They didn't trust humanity to be in charge of such an important war.)

There is no "Human Council." The council is reconstituted with humans in the lead, but not the only members. It wouldn't be much of a "Council" if there was no one to take council with.

[YouKnowMyName]

cap and gown wrote...


There is no "Human Council." The council is reconstituted with humans in the lead, but not the only members. It wouldn't be much of a "Council" if there was no one to take council with.

Oh, I see, thanks for clearing that up. I shall certainly keep that in mind on future playthroughs.